Farmers call on religious institutions to follow the Lord’s admonition and “remove the planks’ from their own eyes ...”

Well, at least one farmer is. For all of you journalists out there, you want a story, a real investigative piece? Read the following, and then “find the money, and follow the money.” As mentioned previously, rank and file, genuine farmworkers are overwhelmingly not involved in this latest lobbying event or in the past general activities of the New York State Labor Religion Coalition Inc. (NYSLRC), the Mid-Hudson/Catskill Rural & Migrant Ministry Inc. (RMM), and the Centro Independiente de Trabajadores Agrícolas Inc. (CITA). The plain facts bear this assertion out. It’s the reason why RMM operatives will not clearly state how many genuine farmworkers are participating in this (or other events) without being paid to do so. The paltry few farmworkers that are at these events, if they even are or once were farmworkers, are mere window dressing. Since this is not a grass-roots, farmworker driven agenda, then logic dictates that the true motives as well as the honesty, ethics, integrity, consistency, and credibility of the responsible parties behind this agenda is of a primary concern and it is a legitimate issue for close examination and scrutiny. One has to ask, what is their real motivation? These organizations (NYSLRC, RMM, CITA) represent the issues and concerns of the institutions that primarily fund them, very large religious organizations. Just read the updates each day as to who is really marching and where they are going to and from each day. Regarding these religious institutions, these are organizations and an industry that doesn’t rush to apply or encourage THEIR OWN employees to do and/or have what they are attempting to dictate should apply to the agricultural industry. Last year I e-mailed the questions below (see e-mail copies below), regarding collective bargaining rights, multiple times, to the key religious institutions that primarily fund/back NYSLRC, RMM, and CITA, including the Roman Catholic Diocese of NY, Albany & Rochester, the Episcopal Diocese of NY, Albany & Rochester and a number of Catholic Charities. It should be pointed out that religious based institutions, whether it’s their private schools, or hospitals, have a long, rich tradition of being anti-union. Or should I say, they are pro-union, unless it is people that happen to work for them, that is. From the National Interfaith Committee for Worker Justice (NICWJ) website: “Engages Religious Employers: Religiously-affiliated non-profit institutions, such as hospitals and nursing homes, should model the highest standard of employer-employee relations. Unfortunately some religious institutions hire union-busting ‘consultants’ and engage in unethical, and sometimes illegal behavior toward workers when they attempt to form a union. NICWJ has developed resources to educate people of faith about this issue.” (http://www.nicwj.org/pages/aboutus.html) So, it was no real surprise that most of the institutions contacted by me refused to respond. A couple said they would call and/or get back to me, and they never did. Only one, the Episcopal Diocese of NY, even remotely attempted to answer my questions, though they ignored my follow-up questions which attempted to get them to actually directly answer my specific questions regarding their actions and stance on this issue. Let me also point out that in NYS labor law non-profit organizations, at the time of their formation/incorporation, can elect to apply for an exemption to pay overtime. So, odds are, the above named larger religious institutions as well as the individual churches that are prompting/backing RMM, NYSLRC and CITA and calling on farmers to pay overtime to farmworkers are probably EXEMPT AND NOT PAYING OVERTIME TO THEIR OWN EMPLOYEES. Further, a common theme of these groups is that the various labor law exemptions that exist in agriculture are morally wrong in that they are exemptions. In other words, all exemptions are “bad.” Yet, these religious institutions and their quasi-religious action organizations benefit immensely from Federal And State Income Tax EXCLUSIONS (I mean Exemptions) as well as Local Property Tax EXCLUSIONS (I mean Exemptions). Simple deductive reasoning, if: All exemptions to the law are “bad” Tax exemptions for religious non profits are exemptions Therefore, tax exemptions for religious non profits are “bad” For moral consistency, when can the public expect these organizations to march on Washington D.C. and Albany to end the exemptions, the tax exemtions, that greatly benefit them? Or is it that these organizations get to decide which exemptions are “good” and which are “bad?” I know I didn’t vote for them to decide for me what is “good” and what is “bad.” Did you? To repeat, these large religious institutions are the ones calling the shots and setting the agenda regarding such groups as RMM, NYSLRC and CITA, not actual farmworkers. Their outright hypocrisy, whether regarding overtime or collective bargaining is astounding. It reminds one of the passage in the Bible at Luke 6:41-42: “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.” What is also disturbing is that these 3 organizations, RMM, NYSLRC and CITA, are flagrant abusers of the 501(c)3 tax code. Their true primary program activities, the amount of lobbying they engage in as well their tactics and type of information they disseminate, all disqualify them from holding that very lucrative tax status (as PIW states, “In addition to exempting an organization from income tax, 501(c)3 status entitles a group to solicit tax-deductible contributions (and thereby tap into a form of taxpayer funding).” http://www.publicinterestwatch.org/eye.htm). The only reason they are able to maintain their 501(c)3 status is because they do not report, honestly, to the IRS what is the true nature of their activities and how much and how often they are engaging in prohibited activities. I know this because I have read their tax returns (and you can too, go here: http://www.guidestar.org/ ; registration for the site is free). The IRS should not only audit the proxy organizations of RMM, NYSLRC and CITA, but it should also take a good, hard look at the various larger diocese and other institutions and smaller churches that are funding these proxy organizations, so as to determine if they too are or aren’t complying with relevant tax law and IRS code as well. Hhmm ..., or maybe the IRS is already looking at them. Who knows? One oversight agency, the NYS Lobby Commission, has already investigated and heavily fined RMM and NYSLRC (http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2002/07/30/camfined.htm). And speaking of ethics, here is a real fun fact, neither RMM nor NYSLRC ever bothered to tell their membership that they were investigated and fined by the Lobby Commission. Consider the seriousness of that for a moment via a comparative analogy. Can you imagine the public outcry, and deservedly so, if a publicly traded corporation was investigated and fined by the SEC and then never bothered to tell their shareholders what happened? So, what’s the difference, when non-profit organizations are investigated and fined by an oversight agency and then never bother to tell that to their “stakeholder” members? Legally they may not be required to notify their membership and supporters, but ethically? Where’s the outrage? Why should you care? Because it’s your tax dollars being abused to fund these organizations’ activities. Now, you may agree with them, and you may be inclined to excuse their violations, but, keep in mind, it also gives the excuse to organizations you may not agree with, on the other side of the political aisle, to grossly abuse this designation as well. As the saying goes, “sauce for the goose .... (http://www.publicinterestwatch.org/) And how can organizations and actors that claim to represent the “moral high ground” so clearly, blatantly and openly, cheat? How is that “moral?” It looks more like “the ends justify the means” to me. Read the e-mails below, then please rationalize or explain to me the apparent outrageous hypocrisy at play here. Because I find it all to be equally astounding and appalling. Chris Pawelski evep@warwick.net ______________________________________________________________________________ Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 05:35:35 -0500 To: info@dioceseny.org From: Chris & Eve Pawelski <evep@warwick.net> Subject: Quick questions Cc: mcyr@dioceseny.org Bcc: X-Attachments: Augsut 18, 2003 Hello, I have a few quick questions. I just caught the following article/news story: "Turmoil in Texas: Firings raise parishioners' hackles -- and questions about church's obligation to follow its own labor teachings" http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/church/explanation I was just wondering what the Episcopal Diocese of New York's stand on this issue is. Are clerical/support staff of the Episcopal Diocese of New York allowed to organize and join a labor union, and if so, what unions are they members of? I must now admit that I find it to be more than a bit disconcerting that I have sent this e-mail with these very simple questions three times previously (8/10, 8/11, 8/14) without a response, or even an acknowledgement of receipt on your part (apart from an auto-response sent by Mark Cyr, not a human reply) of these very simple questions with a note that you are attempting to ascertain the answers. Should I interpret your lack of a response as a NO, that your clerical/support staff are not allowed to join a labor union and you agree with the position taken by the Brownsville diocese? Frankly, that wouldn't surprise me. As another article about this issue stated, "'It’s unfortunate that many of our religious institutions -- not just Catholic -- often respond poorly when workers choose to organize,' said Kim Bobo, executive director of the Chicago-based National Interfaith Committee for Worker Justice. 'Somehow they take it that the workers are opposed to the institution, that they don’t respect the leadership. In reality, workers just want to have a collective voice to affect their future.'" (http://www.natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2003c/080103/080103a.php) Hopefully your lack of a reply is merely a clerical oversight. Again, I want to thank you for your time and attention and I keenly anticipate your responses. Sincerely, Chris ______________________________________________________________________________ Regarding the e-mail below, the spokesperson for the Episcopal Diocese of NY (Neva Rae Fox) never clarified her response to me or responded a second time. ______________________________________________________________________________ Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:48:15 -0500 To: "Fox, Neva Rae" <nrfox@dioceseny.org> From: Chris & Eve Pawelski <evep@warwick.net> Subject: Clarification Cc: Bcc: X-Attachments: August 22, 2003 (reply sent second time) One clarification, when I refer to "clerical" staff I'm talking more about clerks, secretaries, etc..., not priests. Hi Neva Rae Fox, Allow me please to add a little follow-up to my initial reply to you (which is found below). In an article about the Brownsville situation (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A10304-2003Jul4&notFound=true ) Bishop Pena said the following: "Peña, in his e-mailed statement, said: 'I have always been an advocate for social justice in Texas. I have supported labor's right to collective bargaining, and I support it now. Cesar Chavez [founder of the UFW] was my friend, and as a young priest I supported his organizing efforts.'" That sounds a lot like what you said in your reply to me. Yet in the same article Pena and Pena's underling said the following concerning Diocese employees joinng a labor union: "'I honestly do not believe that it is necessary or beneficial for church employees in the Valley to join a labor union,' he ( Peña ) said in an e-mailed response to questions from The Washington Post...." and "Unions 'do not make sense in covenantal relationships of trust and love,' Robert E. Maher, vicar general of the diocese, wrote last July in an e-mail to a lawyer who protested the diocese's policy. 'There is no place in the Christian community for divisions along the lines of self-interest, and that means, among other things, no unions.'" So, I have to scratch my head and wonder a bit regarding your reply. Please try to understand my confusion. I had already visited the website you mentioned and reviewed the Labor Day prayer stuff. If your organization really feels that way, why doesn't "management" (in this case the Bishop and his immediate subordinates and those in management positions) ACTIVELY ENCOURAGE Diocese support staff (clerical, janitorial, whatever) to either form a new or join the appropriate existing union? If that's how you truly feel. How does one point the finger at other industries, dictating what they should be doing regarding their employees when it appears the Diocese isn't doing the same for its own employees? Doesn't that strike you as just a bit strange, if not hypocritical? Is it the "Do as I say, not as I do" approach/model? I'm not trying to be difficult here, but I can't seem to understand the apparrent hypocrisy. Additional information or insight would be most appreciated. I look foward to your response. Sincerely, Chris ______________________________________________________________________________ >Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 11:12:19 -0400 >To: "Fox, Neva Rae" <nrfox@dioceseny.org> >From: Chris & Eve Pawelski <evep@warwick.net> >Subject: Re: Answer to inquiry from Chris >Cc: >Bcc: >X-Attachments: > >Hi Neva Rae Fox, > >Thanks for the reply. > >So, if the the clerical/support staff and other employees of the Episcopal Diocese of New York decided to form and/or join a union the Diocese wouldn't attempt to bust them or play hardball the same way the RC Diocese of Brownsville Texas (http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/church/explanation) is doing to their employees? Am I understanding you correctly? > >Thanks and I look forward to the follow-up. > >Take care, > >Chris > > >>Chris, >>Please note that the delay in responding to you was based on attendance at the Episcopal Church's General Convention - I just returned from Minneapolis. I appreciate your patience. >>The Episcopal Diocese of New York has a history of advocacy for the rights of all people and lives out this belief in advocating for the rights and dignity of all workers. The staff of the diocese is not unionized and to my knowledge it has never been an issue. >>For your information, on the home page of the diocesan web site, we are offering prayers and ideas for observing Labor Day. You can check it out at www.dioceseny.org <<http://www.dioceseny.org>>. >>Sincerely, >>Neva Rae Fox >>Director of Communications >>Episcopal Diocese of New York >>1047 Amsterdam Ave. >>NY, NY 10025 >>*********************************** >>E: NRFox@dioceseny.org >>Pager: **************** > > >

<p>Well, at least one farmer is.</p> <p>For all of you journalists out there, you want a story, a real investigative piece? Read the following, and then “find the money, and follow the money.”</p> <p>As mentioned previously, rank and file, genuine farmworkers are overwhelmingly not involved in this latest lobbying event or in the past general activities of the New York State Labor Religion Coalition Inc. (NYSLRC), the Mid-Hudson/Catskill Rural &amp; Migrant Ministry Inc. (RMM), and the Centro Independiente de Trabajadores Agrícolas Inc. (CITA). The plain facts bear this assertion out. It’s the reason why RMM operatives will not clearly state how many genuine farmworkers are participating in this (or other events) without being paid to do so. The paltry few farmworkers that are at these events, if they even are or once were farmworkers, are mere window dressing.</p> <p>Since this is not a grass-roots, farmworker driven agenda, then logic dictates that the true motives as well as the honesty, ethics, integrity, consistency, and credibility of the responsible parties behind this agenda is of a primary concern and it is a legitimate issue for close examination and scrutiny. One has to ask, what is their real motivation? These organizations (NYSLRC, RMM, CITA) represent the issues and concerns of the institutions that primarily fund them, very large religious organizations. Just read the updates each day as to who is really marching and where they are going to and from each day. Regarding these religious institutions, these are organizations and an industry that doesn’t rush to apply or encourage THEIR OWN employees to do and/or have what they are attempting to dictate should apply to the agricultural industry.</p> <p>Last year I e-mailed the questions below (see e-mail copies below), regarding collective bargaining rights, multiple times, to the key religious institutions that primarily fund/back NYSLRC, RMM, and CITA, including the Roman Catholic Diocese of NY, Albany &amp; Rochester, the Episcopal Diocese of NY, Albany &amp; Rochester and a number of Catholic Charities. It should be pointed out that religious based institutions, whether it’s their private schools, or hospitals, have a long, rich tradition of being anti-union. Or should I say, they are pro-union, unless it is people that happen to work for them, that is. From the National Interfaith Committee for Worker Justice (NICWJ) website:</p> <p>“Engages Religious Employers: Religiously-affiliated non-profit institutions, such as hospitals and nursing homes, should model the highest standard of employer-employee relations. Unfortunately some religious institutions hire union-busting ‘consultants’ and engage in unethical, and sometimes illegal behavior toward workers when they attempt to form a union. NICWJ has developed resources to educate people of faith about this issue.” (<a href="http://www.nicwj.org/pages/aboutus.html">http://www.nicwj.org/pages/aboutus.html</a>)</p> <p>So, it was no real surprise that most of the institutions contacted by me refused to respond. A couple said they would call and/or get back to me, and they never did. Only one, the Episcopal Diocese of NY, even remotely attempted to answer my questions, though they ignored my follow-up questions which attempted to get them to actually directly answer my specific questions regarding their actions and stance on this issue.</p> <p>Let me also point out that in NYS labor law non-profit organizations, at the time of their formation/incorporation, can elect to apply for an exemption to pay overtime. So, odds are, the above named larger religious institutions as well as the individual churches that are prompting/backing RMM, NYSLRC and CITA and calling on farmers to pay overtime to farmworkers are probably EXEMPT AND NOT PAYING OVERTIME TO THEIR OWN EMPLOYEES.</p> <p>Further, a common theme of these groups is that the various labor law exemptions that exist in agriculture are morally wrong in that they are exemptions. In other words, all exemptions are “bad.” Yet, these religious institutions and their quasi-religious action organizations benefit immensely from Federal And State Income Tax EXCLUSIONS (I mean Exemptions) as well as Local Property Tax EXCLUSIONS (I mean Exemptions). </p> <p>Simple deductive reasoning, if:</p> <p>All exemptions to the law are “bad”<br /> Tax exemptions for religious non profits are exemptions<br /> Therefore, tax exemptions for religious non profits are “bad”</p> <p>For moral consistency, when can the public expect these organizations to march on Washington D.C. and Albany to end the exemptions, the tax exemtions, that greatly benefit them? Or is it that these organizations get to decide which exemptions are “good” and which are “bad?” I know I didn’t vote for them to decide for me what is “good” and what is “bad.” Did you?</p> <p>To repeat, these large religious institutions are the ones calling the shots and setting the agenda regarding such groups as RMM, NYSLRC and CITA, not actual farmworkers. Their outright hypocrisy, whether regarding overtime or collective bargaining is astounding. It reminds one of the passage in the Bible at Luke 6:41-42:</p> <p>“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.”</p> <p>What is also disturbing is that these 3 organizations, RMM, NYSLRC and CITA, are flagrant abusers of the 501(c)3 tax code. Their true primary program activities, the amount of lobbying they engage in as well their tactics and type of information they disseminate, all disqualify them from holding that very lucrative tax status (as PIW states, “In addition to exempting an organization from income tax, 501(c)3 status entitles a group to solicit tax-deductible contributions (and thereby tap into a form of taxpayer funding).” <a href="http://www.publicinterestwatch.org/eye.htm">http://www.publicinterestwatch.org/eye.htm</a>). The only reason they are able to maintain their 501(c)3 status is because they do not report, honestly, to the IRS what is the true nature of their activities and how much and how often they are engaging in prohibited activities. I know this because I have read their tax returns (and you can too, go here: <a href="http://www.guidestar.org/">http://www.guidestar.org/</a> ; registration for the site is free).</p> <p>The IRS should not only audit the proxy organizations of RMM, NYSLRC and CITA, but it should also take a good, hard look at the various larger diocese and other institutions and smaller churches that are funding these proxy organizations, so as to determine if they too are or aren’t complying with relevant tax law and IRS code as well.</p> <p>Hhmm ..., or maybe the IRS is already looking at them. Who knows? One oversight agency, the NYS Lobby Commission, has already investigated and heavily fined RMM and NYSLRC (<a href="http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2002/07/30/camfined.htm">http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2002/07/30/camfined.htm</a>). And speaking of ethics, here is a real fun fact, neither RMM nor NYSLRC ever bothered to tell their membership that they were investigated and fined by the Lobby Commission. Consider the seriousness of that for a moment via a comparative analogy. Can you imagine the public outcry, and deservedly so, if a publicly traded corporation was investigated and fined by the SEC and then never bothered to tell their shareholders what happened? So, what’s the difference, when non-profit organizations are investigated and fined by an oversight agency and then never bother to tell that to their “stakeholder” members? Legally they may not be required to notify their membership and supporters, but ethically? Where’s the outrage?</p> <p>Why should you care? Because it’s your tax dollars being abused to fund these organizations’ activities. Now, you may agree with them, and you may be inclined to excuse their violations, but, keep in mind, it also gives the excuse to organizations you may not agree with, on the other side of the political aisle, to grossly abuse this designation as well. As the saying goes, “sauce for the goose .... (<a href="http://www.publicinterestwatch.org/">http://www.publicinterestwatch.org/</a>)</p> <p>And how can organizations and actors that claim to represent the “moral high ground” so clearly, blatantly and openly, cheat? How is that “moral?” It looks more like “the ends justify the means” to me.</p> <p>Read the e-mails below, then please rationalize or explain to me the apparent outrageous hypocrisy at play here. Because I find it all to be equally astounding and appalling.</p> <p>Chris Pawelski<br /> <a href="mailto:evep@warwick.net">evep@warwick.net</a></p> <p>______________________________________________________________________________</p> <p>Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 05:35:35 -0500<br /> To: <a href="mailto:info@dioceseny.org">info@dioceseny.org</a><br /> From: Chris &amp; Eve Pawelski <evep><br /> Subject: Quick questions<br /> Cc: <a href="mailto:mcyr@dioceseny.org">mcyr@dioceseny.org</a><br /> Bcc:<br /> X-Attachments: </evep></p> <p>Augsut 18, 2003</p> <p>Hello,</p> <p>I have a few quick questions. I just caught the following article/news story:</p> <p>"Turmoil in Texas: Firings raise parishioners' hackles -- and questions about church's obligation to follow its own labor teachings"</p> <p><a href="http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/church/explanation">http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/church/explanation</a></p> <p>I was just wondering what the Episcopal Diocese of New York's stand on this issue is. Are clerical/support staff of the Episcopal Diocese of New York allowed to organize and join a labor union, and if so, what unions are they members of?</p> <p>I must now admit that I find it to be more than a bit disconcerting that I have sent this e-mail with these very simple questions three times previously (8/10, 8/11, 8/14) without a response, or even an acknowledgement of receipt on your part (apart from an auto-response sent by Mark Cyr, not a human reply) of these very simple questions with a note that you are attempting to ascertain the answers. Should I interpret your lack of a response as a NO, that your clerical/support staff are not allowed to join a labor union and you agree with the position taken by the Brownsville diocese? Frankly, that wouldn't surprise me. As another article about this issue stated, </p> <p>"'It’s unfortunate that many of our religious institutions -- not just Catholic -- often respond poorly when workers choose to organize,' said Kim Bobo, executive director of the Chicago-based National Interfaith Committee for Worker Justice. 'Somehow they take it that the workers are opposed to the institution, that they don’t respect the leadership. In reality, workers just want to have a collective voice to affect their future.'" (<a href="http://www.natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2003c/080103/080103a.php">http://www.natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2003c/080103/080103a.php</a>)</p> <p>Hopefully your lack of a reply is merely a clerical oversight. Again, I want to thank you for your time and attention and I keenly anticipate your responses.</p> <p>Sincerely,</p> <p>Chris</p> <p>______________________________________________________________________________</p> <p>Regarding the e-mail below, the spokesperson for the Episcopal Diocese of NY (Neva Rae Fox) never clarified her response to me or responded a second time.</p> <p>______________________________________________________________________________</p> <p>Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:48:15 -0500<br /> To: "Fox, Neva Rae" <nrfox><br /> From: Chris &amp; Eve Pawelski <evep><br /> Subject: Clarification<br /> Cc:<br /> Bcc:<br /> X-Attachments: </evep></nrfox></p> <p>August 22, 2003<br /> (reply sent second time)</p> <p>One clarification, when I refer to "clerical" staff I'm talking more about clerks, secretaries, etc..., not priests.</p> <p>Hi Neva Rae Fox,</p> <p>Allow me please to add a little follow-up to my initial reply to you (which is found below).</p> <p>In an article about the Brownsville situation (<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&amp;node=&amp;contentId=A10304-2003Jul4&amp;notFound=true">http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&amp;node=&amp;contentI...</a> ) Bishop Pena said the following:</p> <p>"Peña, in his e-mailed statement, said: 'I have always been an advocate for social justice in Texas. I have supported labor's right to collective bargaining, and I support it now. Cesar Chavez [founder of the UFW] was my friend, and as a young priest I supported his organizing efforts.'"</p> <p>That sounds a lot like what you said in your reply to me. Yet in the same article Pena and Pena's underling said the following concerning Diocese employees joinng a labor union:</p> <p>"'I honestly do not believe that it is necessary or beneficial for church employees in the Valley to join a labor union,' he ( Peña ) said in an e-mailed response to questions from The Washington Post...." </p> <p>and</p> <p>"Unions 'do not make sense in covenantal relationships of trust and love,' Robert E. Maher, vicar general of the diocese, wrote last July in an e-mail to a lawyer who protested the diocese's policy. 'There is no place in the Christian community for divisions along the lines of self-interest, and that means, among other things, no unions.'"</p> <p>So, I have to scratch my head and wonder a bit regarding your reply. Please try to understand my confusion. I had already visited the website you mentioned and reviewed the Labor Day prayer stuff. If your organization really feels that way, why doesn't "management" (in this case the Bishop and his immediate subordinates and those in management positions) ACTIVELY ENCOURAGE Diocese support staff (clerical, janitorial, whatever) to either form a new or join the appropriate existing union? If that's how you truly feel. How does one point the finger at other industries, dictating what they should be doing regarding their employees when it appears the Diocese isn't doing the same for its own employees? Doesn't that strike you as just a bit strange, if not hypocritical? Is it the "Do as I say, not as I do" approach/model?</p> <p>I'm not trying to be difficult here, but I can't seem to understand the apparrent hypocrisy. Additional information or insight would be most appreciated. I look foward to your response.</p> <p>Sincerely,</p> <p>Chris</p> <p>______________________________________________________________________________</p> <p>&gt;Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 11:12:19 -0400<br /> &gt;To: "Fox, Neva Rae" <nrfox><br /> &gt;From: Chris &amp; Eve Pawelski <evep><br /> &gt;Subject: Re: Answer to inquiry from Chris<br /> &gt;Cc:<br /> &gt;Bcc:<br /> &gt;X-Attachments:<br /> &gt;<br /> &gt;Hi Neva Rae Fox,<br /> &gt;<br /> &gt;Thanks for the reply.<br /> &gt;<br /> &gt;So, if the the clerical/support staff and other employees of the Episcopal Diocese of New York decided to form and/or join a union the Diocese wouldn't attempt to bust them or play hardball the same way the RC Diocese of Brownsville Texas (<a href="http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/church/explanation">http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/church/explanation</a>) is doing to their employees? Am I understanding you correctly?<br /> &gt;<br /> &gt;Thanks and I look forward to the follow-up.<br /> &gt;<br /> &gt;Take care,<br /> &gt;<br /> &gt;Chris<br /> &gt;<br /> &gt;<br /> &gt;&gt;Chris,<br /> &gt;&gt;Please note that the delay in responding to you was based on attendance at the Episcopal Church's General Convention - I just returned from Minneapolis. I appreciate your patience.<br /> &gt;&gt;The Episcopal Diocese of New York has a history of advocacy for the rights of all people and lives out this belief in advocating for the rights and dignity of all workers. The staff of the diocese is not unionized and to my knowledge it has never been an issue.<br /> &gt;&gt;For your information, on the home page of the diocesan web site, we are offering prayers and ideas for observing Labor Day. You can check it out at <a href="http://www.dioceseny.org">www.dioceseny.org</a> &gt;.<br /> &gt;&gt;Sincerely,<br /> &gt;&gt;Neva Rae Fox<br /> &gt;&gt;Director of Communications<br /> &gt;&gt;Episcopal Diocese of New York<br /> &gt;&gt;1047 Amsterdam Ave.<br /> &gt;&gt;NY, NY 10025<br /> &gt;&gt;***********************************<br /> &gt;&gt;E: <a href="mailto:NRFox@dioceseny.org">NRFox@dioceseny.org</a><br /> &gt;&gt;Pager: ****************<br /> &gt;<br /> &gt;<br /> &gt;</evep></nrfox></p>